Kentucky’s election system could use reforms, but ‘vote by mail’ is not the answer

In 2020, the ability of Americans to safely exercise their right to vote faces its most significant challenge in history: the coronavirus.

Here in Kentucky, we are blessed to have one of the nation’s most accomplished election lawyers to guide us through this crisis. Secretary of State Michael Adams worked with the State Board of Elections to present Governor Beshear with a bi-partisan plan for the primary election that keeps poll workers and voters safe while ensuring every eligible voter can participate. I applaud them all for their work.

These are extraordinary times that call for extraordinary measures and, while I strongly believe many of these changes should be valid only for the primary election (and possible the general depending on how the COVID recovery progresses) that is not to say our elections aren’t without flaws and in need of some significant changes.

Before discussing reforms I support, let me address early voting. When I hear someone say “I support early voting” what I hear is “I think elections are too short and not expensive enough.” Campaigns are built like symphonies with Election Day as the final movement. Early voting forces campaigns to crescendo early and try to hold the high note for weeks. That means they need more money to run more ads, and voters run the risk of new, disqualifying information coming out on someone for whom they’ve already cast a ballot. It’s simply not a good way to vote.

One positive change would be to expand voting hours. 6 p.m. is too early to end voting. We need to go until at least 8 p.m., if not 9 p.m.

Also, Kentucky needs to make permanent some of this year’s expansion of excuses for absentee voting. We have very restrictive absentee voting law; for example, if a woman is pregnant and due any day, she’s excused but her partner is not. While I don’t know of any clerks who actually demand evidence to prove excuses, I do believe it discourages people from voting absentee and the numbers bear that out; Kentucky has one of the lowest rates of absentee voting in the nation. We should make it easier to qualify.

It’s important to note that expanding absentee voting is not the same as “vote by mail”, which some national Democrats have latched on as their new cause célèbre. While absentee voting requires voters to request a ballot, “vote by mail” is a specific proposal where ballots are mailed to every registered voter.

Let me be clear, vote by mail devolves something that is supposed to be a competition of ideas into a scavenger hunt for ballots. It’s less concerned with persuading voters on issues and more interested in checking boxes and collecting paper. If you want more ‘low-information’ voters, then vote by mail is for you but I’m not for it. Not to mention, parts of Kentucky have an unfortunate history of treating the ballot as a transactional commodity. If you want to stimulate the economy of certain areas of the state, this will do it. If you want free and fair elections, there are better solutions such as expanded absentee voting.

Finally, I’d like to offer a word of caution on the push for more federal oversight of elections. Our elections are incredibly hard to hack because their administration is so disjointed and decentralized; it’s a feature, not a flaw. Every move to centralize election administration weakens election security. Elections should continue to be administered by local clerks, not an agency in Washington, DC.

There is no question our elections need modernizing reforms. However, when discussing election reform, we should be asking the question: “how do we make our elections better” not just “how do we increase the number of votes.”

Tres Watson is the founder of Capitol Reins PR and co-host of the Kentucky Politics Weekly Podcast.

This story was originally published May 20, 2020 at 2:43 PM.